4.1 Article

Conjunctival and corneal hyperesthesia in subjects with dryness symptoms

期刊

OPTOMETRY AND VISION SCIENCE
卷 85, 期 9, 页码 867-872

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181852788

关键词

corneal and conjunctival hypersensitivity; Belmonte pneumatic ethesiometer; dry eye symptomatic subjects; age; gender

资金

  1. NSERC Canada
  2. Canada Foundation for Innovation, and Allergan, USA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose. To compare conjunctival and corneal sensitivity in noncontact lens wearing subjects with and without symptoms of ocular dryness, stratified by age and gender. Methods. Ninety-seven subjects were enrolled, 54 of whom were asymptomatic and 43 of whom were symptomatic of ocular dryness. A single score for the symptom of dryness was used to classify nondry eye (scores of none to trace) and dry eye symptomatic (scores of mild to severe) groups. The subjects were further stratified into younger (19 to 49 years) and older age groups (50 to 80 years). Conjunctival and corneal sensitivity of the right eye was measured at the central cornea and temporal conjunctiva, using a computer-controlled pneumatic esthesiometer with stimulus temperature set at 20 degrees C. The ascending method of limits was used to determine the thresholds. Results. Conjunctival and corneal thresholds were significantly lower in the city eye symptomatic than in the nondry eye group (both p < 0.01). The conjunctival threshold was lower than the corneal threshold in the dry eye symptomatic group (p < 0.01) but not in the nondry eye group (p > 0.05). Conjunctival threshold in the nondry eye women was lower than the men (p < 0.05). No difference between age groups was found for Conjunctival and corneal thresholds in this study (all p > 0.05). Conclusions. Conjunctival and corneal sensitivity to pneumatic cool stimulation is increased in Subjects with Symptoms of ocular dryness. This hyperesthesia seems to be more significant in the conjunctiva.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据